https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198299 Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act requires the contract for transfer of immovable property to be in writing and signed by or on behalf of the transferor, with terms ascertainable with reasonable certainty. A mutation application that merely refers to an earlier oral sale does not itself constitute the written contract, so the defence of part performance cannot be maintained on that basis. The request for refund of alleged consideration was also declined because it had not been pleaded in the written statements, no issue or finding existed on the amount or usufruct, and the relief was sought only at argument stage; the party was left to pursue any separate remedy. en-us Fri, 26 Feb 1943 00:00:00 +0630 Mon, 29 Jan 2018 10:07:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198299 Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act requires the contract for transfer of immovable property to be in writing and signed by or on behalf of the transferor, with terms ascertainable with reasonable certainty. A mutation application that merely refers to an earlier oral sale does not itself constitute the written contract, so the defence of part performance cannot be maintained on that basis. The request for refund of alleged consideration was also declined because it had not been pleaded in the written statements, no issue or finding existed on the amount or usufruct, and the relief was sought only at argument stage; the party was left to pursue any separate remedy. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 26 Feb 1943 00:00:00 +0630 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198299